This dispute involves a securities depository (“CDC”), a securities commission (“SECZ”), a stock exchange (“ZSE”) and the “Minister of Finance”. CDC seeks a review of a directive issued by SECZ on 15 October 2021 on the basis that SECZ (a) acted ultra vires the law and (b) failed to observe procedural fairness in issuing the directive . More
This is a court application in terms of section 52 of the Administration of Estates Act, Chapter 6:01 in which the applicant puts a challenge to the decision by the Master and seeks relief in the following terms:
“1. The Master’s decision in terms of a letter dated 27 February 2015 to the effect that Glassalla Farm, Centenary is not a matrimonial property in terms of section 3A of the Deceased Estates Succession Act {Chapter 6:02} be and is hereby set aside.
2. Applicant be and is hereby declared to be the sole beneficiary of a certain piece of land... More
This application was first filed on 13 December 2017 wherein the applicant seeks admission to bail pending appeal. The application was either withdrawn or struck off the roll several times on account of the applicant’s failure to file the record of proceedings. It suffices to record that after all the delays in the hearing of the bail application, it turned out that the application could not be heard anyway because on 21 September 2020 after I had requested for the appeal record CA 648/16 for perusal and to confirm that the applicant’s appeal was still pending given the time of... More
At the hearing of this matter the applicant raised three points in limine against the 1st and 2nd respondents and moved that they should remain barred and judgment be granted in his favour against them as prayed.
The first issue was that the 2nd respondent filed its opposing papers out of time and was automatically barred. It should have applied for the upliftment of the bar but it did not. It was served with the court application on 16 December 2003 by the Deputy Sheriff. The dies induciae expired on 5 January 2004. The 2nd respondent only filed its notice... More
At the conclusion of the trial on 18 October 2022, counsels agreed to file written heads of argument. Mr Zenda undertook to file heads on behalf of the plaintiff by 24 October 2022 and he complied with his undertaking. Mr Mahuni undertook to file heads on behalf of the defendant by 28 October 2022. At the time of writing this judgment on 1 November 2022 no such heads were filed neither was there any explanation for such failure from Mr Mahuni. The court can only express its displeasure at such failure but nevertheless proceed to prepare its judgment. More
